On Mon, May 05, 2008 at 10:45:31AM +0200, Artur Grabowski wrote:
> Pieter Verberne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "public domain" is a meaningless term in many countries (it doesn't have
> any meaning in courts, which in turn means that you keep all the rights
> that copyright law gives you).
>
> I
On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 08:40:00PM +0200, Paul de Weerd wrote:
> On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 05:55:16PM +0200, Pieter Verberne wrote:
> | Keeping authorship for a resume sounds like a somewhat good reason
> | to me. I think you could also use public domain code for a resume,
> | but that may have it's
Pieter Verberne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Pulic domain also says "do with it whatever you like". I really don't
> know about the importance of the disclaimer. Maybe it depends on
> the country you live in.
"public domain" is a meaningless term in many countries (it doesn't have
any meaning in
On 5/4/08 8:37 PM, Lars NoodC)n wrote:
Marco Peereboom wrote:
public domain is not properly defined in the framework of the law.
http://www.copyright.cornell.edu/public_domain/
Public domain is very clearly defined by law: it is the absence of
copyright. If it's public domain, then you and
2008/5/4 debian developer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Let me make a few things clear. I am a newbie. I'm not a troll but a
> seriously curious guy wanting to know.
Which is why you stay anonym and don't follow the discussion. Looks
like trolling to me.
OTOH a non-troll would have the knowledge of
ht
On 5/4/08 12:15 PM, Pieter Verberne wrote:
But wouldn't it be just great to put anything
like this in a file's header? :
# This file is in public domain
or even better:
# public domain
When there is no name there is nobody who can testify it is in the
public domain.
Don't forget: Basically
> "Pieter" == Pieter Verberne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Pieter> I'm wondering what OpenBSD people think about BSD (-like) licenses
Pieter> versus public domain.
"public domain" is not a legal "license" in some countries. In other
words, you can't totally give away all your rights. So, an
On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 05:55:16PM +0200, Pieter Verberne wrote:
| > As an example, I like to give away my code for people to study and play
| > with. The only thing I "demand" is credit for that piece of code. The
| > reason I do not abandon that right is because at some point in my life I
| > m
> The dutch are notoriously known to argue for arguments sake. That is
> what I was getting at.
Come on. Only those of french descent do.
On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 08:32:43PM +0300, Lars Nood??n wrote:
> Marco Peereboom wrote:
>
> > public domain is not properly defined in the framework of the law.
>
> http://www.copyright.cornell.edu/public_domain/
>
> Public domain is very clearly defined by law: it is the absence of
> copyright.
On 5/4/08, Pieter Verberne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Pulic domain also says "do with it whatever you like". I really don't
> know about the importance of the disclaimer. Maybe it depends on
> the country you live in. I'm a minimalist is some respects, and I think
> you should not put anythin
On 5/4/08, Pieter Verberne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Keeping authorship for a resume sounds like a somewhat good reason
> to me. I think you could also use public domain code for a resume,
> but that may have it's downsides. My question is something like: is
> keeping copyright worth putting
On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 07:03:09PM +0200, Pieter Verberne wrote:
> > (but going by your name you are just being dutch!).
> I don't understand.. Yes I'm dutch, is this a joke/saying?
Yes and no :-)
The dutch are notoriously known to argue for arguments sake. That is
what I was getting at.
Beware
Marco Peereboom wrote:
> public domain is not properly defined in the framework of the law.
http://www.copyright.cornell.edu/public_domain/
Public domain is very clearly defined by law: it is the absence of
copyright. If it's public domain, then you and everyone else can do
*anything* to it or
On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 11:12:04AM -0500, Marco Peereboom wrote:
> public domain is not properly defined in the framework of the law.
True (in the Nederlands), I recently wrote a letter to the Ministry
of Justice about dutch copyright law wich does not give an author
the possibility to put a work
On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 04:31:11PM +, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2008-05-04, Pieter Verberne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > True, but is the name of the license, or the name + URL enough?
>
> Anyone can then change the contents of the URL later on. For example:
> domain expires, evil scammer
On 2008-05-04, Pieter Verberne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> True, but is the name of the license, or the name + URL enough?
Anyone can then change the contents of the URL later on. For example:
domain expires, evil scammers grab it and publish a new license at the
same URL requiring payment for co
On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 05:55:16PM +0200, Pieter Verberne wrote:
> On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 08:09:41AM -0500, Marco Peereboom wrote:
> > The only section of copyright that isn't surrendered by the ISC license
> > (also often mistakenly called the BSD) is authorship.
> Right.
>
> > As an example, I
On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 03:29:01PM +0200, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 12:12:37PM +0200, Pieter Verberne wrote:
> > > But in general, we choose to remain known as author.
> > > That is our privilege for the files we created or modified
> > > extensively. Whatever you choose to do
On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 08:09:41AM -0500, Marco Peereboom wrote:
> The only section of copyright that isn't surrendered by the ISC license
> (also often mistakenly called the BSD) is authorship.
Right.
> As an example, I like to give away my code for people to study and play
> with. The only thin
On May 4, 2008, at 1:14 AM, Pieter Verberne wrote:
On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 03:38:13AM +0530, debian developer wrote:
["bsd vs. GPL"]
Sorry for 'stealing' this thread but I'm not sure if I should make
a new
thread for this.
I'm wondering what OpenBSD people think about BSD (-like) licenses
On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 12:12:37PM +0200, Pieter Verberne wrote:
> > > If you put anything in public domain, you'll give up your copyright. So
> > > the next person te distribute your software is allowed to remove your
> > > name from the credits list. I can imagine this sounds like a problem for
On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 12:12:37PM +0200, Pieter Verberne wrote:
> > But in general, we choose to remain known as author.
> > That is our privilege for the files we created or modified
> > extensively. Whatever you choose to do with things you publish is your
> > decision.
> Uhm.. "to remain known
On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 01:46:49PM +0200, Almir Karic wrote:
> On Sun, May 4, 2008 at 12:12 PM, Pieter Verberne
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Uhm, dunno what IIRC is.. But wouldn't it be just great to put anything
> > like this in a file's header? :
> > # This file is in public domain
> > or
On Sun, May 4, 2008 at 12:12 PM, Pieter Verberne
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Uhm, dunno what IIRC is.. But wouldn't it be just great to put anything
> like this in a file's header? :
> # This file is in public domain
> or even better:
> # public domain
>
> So IIRC requires the full license?
On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 10:44:07AM +0200, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 10:14:06AM +0200, Pieter Verberne wrote:
> > I'm wondering what OpenBSD people think about BSD (-like) licenses
> > versus public domain.
> >
> > Pulic domain also says "do with it whatever you like". I really
On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 03:38:13AM +0530, debian developer wrote:
> 1. BSD license is completely free. No one needs to give back changes
> forcibly(the GPL way), hence this is completely free.
> If what i hear is correct, there are companies(Microsoft) which
> take BSD code (network stack i hea
On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 10:14:06AM +0200, Pieter Verberne wrote:
> On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 03:38:13AM +0530, debian developer wrote:
> > ["bsd vs. GPL"]
>
> Sorry for 'stealing' this thread but I'm not sure if I should make a new
> thread for this.
>
> I'm wondering what OpenBSD people think abo
On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 03:38:13AM +0530, debian developer wrote:
> ["bsd vs. GPL"]
Sorry for 'stealing' this thread but I'm not sure if I should make a new
thread for this.
I'm wondering what OpenBSD people think about BSD (-like) licenses
versus public domain.
What does the ISC license actuall
Hi,
On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 03:38:13AM +0530, debian developer wrote:
> 1. BSD license is completely free. No one needs to give back changes
> forcibly(the GPL way), hence this is completely free.
> If what i hear is correct, there are companies(Microsoft) which
> take BSD code (network stack
Jacob Meuser ha scritto:
On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 03:38:13AM +0530, debian developer wrote:
Hello,
[snip]
the question is, how is porting free software to non-free platforms
ok, but providing easier ways to install non-free software on free
platforms wrong?
With 2 doubleclick you c
On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 7:10 PM, Jacob Meuser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 03:38:13AM +0530, debian developer wrote:
> > I have a few questions(no, not which license is better.:):
>
It all depends on what you want to do. At the very basic level, the GPL
gives freedom to th
On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 7:22 PM, bofh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> But today, my linux boxes at work can authenticate using kerberos. This
> is a big win for me.
>
That is - authenticate to AD using kerberos. Sorry for any confusion.
--
http://www.glumbert.com/media/shift
http://www.youtube
On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 03:38:13AM +0530, debian developer wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Let me make a few things clear. I am a newbie. I'm not a troll but a
> seriously curious guy wanting to know.
> I searched google but could not find any clear explanation. Please
> point me in the right direction if thi
debian developer wrote:
Let me make a few things clear. I am a newbie. I'm not a troll but a
seriously curious guy wanting to know.
That's what all the trolls say.
If what i hear is correct, there are companies(Microsoft) which
take BSD code (network stack i hear) and made it proprietary
On 5/3/08, debian developer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1. BSD license is completely free. No one needs to give back changes
> forcibly(the GPL way), hence this is completely free.
> If what i hear is correct, there are companies(Microsoft) which
> take BSD code (network stack i hear) and m
36 matches
Mail list logo
